The A7R II and A7S II are not on the list of supported cameras (yet) - just like the A68... Too recent I suppose, no time to cope with them so far. The A77 II is, but at a logically awkward position. I guess it will be done soon, but do not know when.

:)
Not only the beta, the AppStore version was showing it as well. There must be something for each one, it irritated me as the cats are too slim to show the differences well, like the gears do. I agree it´s just cosmetic though. ;)
Makes you wonder, what happened? I´m not aware of anything updating last night, yesterday they still were there. Is there a timer baked in making them vary?

Aperture has no built in RAW converter, it works with Digital Camera RAW, part of OS X, so you should not feel too worried about that.
Anyway, as others have said, RAW editing is never destructive, the files will remain the unhampered same (or so they should). The results of editing are saved as an extension to it, or hidden in a library / catalog, or fully in a different format, no matter what. Editing the results can be destructive, but it does not have to be like that either.

That depends on what you consider on par with ACR... ;)
Rendering? Most certainly.
I am in the process of also re-processing all my old RAWs (slowly), to get their processing out of Aperture and Lightroom: direct comparisons between them usually show equally well or better with PS. That could be biased by a lot more experience with that tool meanwhile. Once in a while, for something a bit difficult or tricky to achieve what I want, at this moment I often also check with AP and it usually takes a bit more time but I manage also. Same bias then, but the other way around I think: I´m much less proficient with AP right now. So far, I do not complain at all, but I have limited gear at my disposal to train on: only some Panasonic LX3, LX5 and LX7, Sigma DP2x, Sony A100 and A900 and finally, Fujifilm X-Pro1 RAW files.
I have also processed quite a few files for a friend´s Fujifilm X-T1 and lenses I don´t have, I was pleased enough with all results, whether using PS or AP, Photo Suite 8 or 9 exclusively or additionally and NIK components, no issues other than required time needed to achieve a goal. He is a Capture One adept, but also has the Photo Suite and AP, so he can compare when he gets my doings back.
Implications of processing? Not so much.
You guess probably: I don´t like the impact of AP´s native file sizes which to me look huge even through eyes looking at a PSD file. Even worse than that IMO is the destructive development stage and the lack of any tiny footprint sidecar (XMP) when finished and no need for further processing (way over 80% of my own processing). It is on the roadmap though, although in what format remains guesswork.
I cannot speak for others, there are not many here, participating in discussions like this.

X-Trans... Yes, that I know. :)
Adobe: quite soon, the reason for me buying Lightroom 4 at the time, which indeed had some issues, especially in my case with ´bleeding reds in traffic signs´; still, it was the only thing doing it at that time. IIRC, it became OK with ACR 8.3, but I didn´t upgrade to LR 5 because already back (high speed) into Aperture land at that time.
Apple: well over a year, I nearly trashed my Aperture - used since release 2, when it came on CDs and was still somewhat expensive! Using their conversion is not all that innovative as I see it, because it´s already there, part of OS X, nothing to do. Bringing a Serif special one is a good idea though, for sure.
Iridient: a lot sooner, quite good too, but my old iMac couldn´t compete with its slowness.
Capture one, since 7.1 if memory still serves, same complaint, beside I didn´t like it a single bit (I know lots of people swear by it though).
Let´s not forget the one coming with a Fujifilm X-Trans camera (I don´t know about others of the same brand): a whole mouth full for a name, RAW FILE CONVERTER EX 2.0 powered by SILKYPIX, basically now a version of SilkyPix 4 limited to Fujifilm X-Trans cameras only, which although quite a bit different and slowish, also delivers quite well.
ON1´s Photo Suite: since release 8 at least.
Lots of others, from Photo Ninja through RPP, didn´t make it to the end of the trial period for me. DxO, don´t mention it, they still don´t know it exists (or better said, they do, but chose to ignore it so far).
Appreciation on performance and rendering is something very subjective, discussions on topic show that time and again. In my personal opinion, Affinity Photo delivers very well but after / below Photoshop. Absolute deal-breakers for me are with RAW processing and file sizes. Initial rendering of an X-Trans file is also very slow as I see it, with 22 seconds on my iMac to load and show (Iridient: 16 seconds sharp), but once it is there, speed is OK. The only one I liked almost as much as PS now was Aperture, but I gave up on it mainly because of the library, also because finally getting beyond the steep learning curve (for me!) with Photoshop CS6. I have high hopes with Affinity Photo and really wish it will evolve into something I can confidently use, instead of PS. I will pay for a DAM looking like Bridge, if that´s in the papers! If AP is not catching up close to the full PS, I´ll probably have to go for Adobe´s much hated and disgusted (all by me) subscription model, if and when a future camera is not included in ACR 9.1.
My main tools at this moment are Photoshop CS6 (100%), Photo Suite 9.5 (occasionally, will not upgrade to 10) and NIK components (always, when useful). However, I keep an eye on Affinity Photo and ´play´ with it a little bit almost every day, discovering and keeping high hopes.

Not me! I was still dreaming of an Amiga, any Amiga, when I got an offer I couldn´t refuse: for a Philips 8250 MSX 2 computer, with two integrated 3.5” floppy drives and its own separate keyboard and monitor! :P

I have fond memories of my Commodore 64, especially the ´Still loading...´ message with the cassette reader. Also of the huge size of the floppy disk reader, once I thought I needed and purchased that. :lol:

The way Affinity offers in the current beta is what Iridient has been doing for quite some time now - I don´t know how it is today, but imagine it didn´t change meanwhile. However, buying Iridient´s or Adobe´s code is, if to be considered at all, probably a matter of quite some investment, for something Serif has shown knowing to do very well itself. In short, the message probably is that when you want to use other provider´s tools, you just need to buy those tools.
OTOH, RAW file processing, persistent development settings especially and stuff like that are already on Affinity Photo´s roadmap; hopefully it will come as something like you can with ACR and Photoshop, AFAIC. :P

It is no actually, as the announcement is ´only´ about an Affinity DAM application, which as such does not and should not include anything about (RAW) image processing. My brains hope for it to be something like Bridge, but I am not in the secret of the Gods. What it will be for real when it´s there, that´s something only Affinity knows and so far their staff didn´t share it with us, AFAIK. It´s a quite recent new development, something in progress...

I shoot and process RAW exclusively since 2006 (my first digital capable of that) and I don´t keep JPG ballast with them on my HDs. Professionals have reasons and workflows which are quite often time impact related methinks, but it has nothing to do with this. I also know lots of people doing everything exclusively with Lightroom or one of its competing flavours, nothing wrong with that either. To each her / his own, that´s perfectly fine with me.

OP is about DAM and would like to know what features it will include...
Of course Photoshop didn´t get any worse through Lightroom! Why would it? You don´t need it at all. You miss the point if considering Lightroom as mainly DAM. Just like Aperture isn´t mainly DAM, only a (small) integrated part of a very good image processor. However, both bring something I consider a lot worse than PS indeed: their integrated Catalog (Lightroom) or Library (Aperture). I don´t need any of either and got rid of using both exactly because of that, not to mention huge additional features available with Photoshop itself.
I have comprehensive RAW development with Photoshop CS6, just like I have it with AP (but not quite, yet). Certainly Affinity Photo can cover all needs when it reaches the same level as Adobe´s stuff. I do expect Affinity´s developers to know this very well, the whole development so far and features already on the roadmap and todo list (also for saving initial RAW processing [hopefully like ACR does]) show that. File sizes with AP are the main bottleneck at the moment indeed, as I see it anyway, but that issue is not something impossible to solve either; exactly as the full version of Photoshop shows.
If you´d rather go with whatever monthly subscription because Affinity DAM wouldn´t be something like Lightroom or Aperture, please be my guest, I am no share holder of either Adobe or Affinity. If the future DAM will be something like you guess and hope, I shall stay with PS; with some regrets for the missed opportunity in that case. Time will tell, I have no say in it anyway, other than with stating my opinion like I do here.